DRAFT LOTTO 2016

[Mori Chu]

The explanation is simple: Baseball sucks. It is boring and almost nobody young cares about it. The sport will be hard pressed to find a young generation of new fans to keep interest in the sport thriving.

[carey]

The explanation is simple: Baseball sucks.

Watch your mouth!

[gosuns]

The explanation is simple: Baseball sucks.

Watch your mouth!

Well it's almost inexistent here in Europe. But I hear football (soccer) is a great sport.
Hey, baseball is a great piece of Americana tho. I enjoyed it watching a dbacks game in person in 2006 when I was in Phoenix for the playoff series vs the spurs. (Yes, the Nash bloodie nose, infamous suspensions, rigged games by refs series)

[Indy]

Yup, and ruin decades and decades of history and common stats. No thanks!

Aren't stats meaningless anyway? Baseball keeps clinging to their "history" and "stats" and all it has done is kill the game.

<threadhijack>Okay, Indy, you gotta explain your perspective on this one to me - as I'm a baseball lifer who has always been knee-deep in the history and stats. </threadhijack

Baseball doesn't suck. It can be a very interesting sport to watch. But it doesn't fit well in the current world of instant gratification that everyone wants.

And it hasn't changed the dynamics enough to allow itself to be marketed to a new generation of fans. It's kind of like the Republican Party. The advocates/fans/party members that love it are all baby boomers (or older) and won't be alive in 15 years.

[Mori Chu]

They just have too much unnecessary down-time in every baseball game. I kind of sort of want to like it, but I can't take watching a 4-hour-long game full of delays and little pauses and breaks. It's mind-numbingly dull.

[Superbone]

They're thinking of adding a pitch clock.

[Mori Chu]

That would help. They need more radical thinking IMO.

[Cap]

They're thinking of adding a pitch clock.

How long?

[Superbone]

They're thinking of adding a pitch clock.

How long?

They're still experimenting but here's what they have tried thus far:

In the Fall League experiment, pitchers had to throw within 12 seconds with no runners on base and within 20 seconds when a base was occupied. There was a maximum of 2:05 between innings and a 2:30 limit for a pitching change. Additionally, hitters were required to have one foot in the batter's box at all times.

http://espn.go.com/mlb/story/_/id/12172 ... iple-games

[Cap]

12 seconds with no runners is OK, I guess.

As for the 20-second clock with runners, does it reset if the pitcher throws to a base? 20 seconds to pitch seems really, really constraining if you have runners taking leads.

[Indy]

They're thinking of adding a pitch clock.

How long?

They're still experimenting but here's what they have tried thus far:

In the Fall League experiment, pitchers had to throw within 12 seconds with no runners on base and within 20 seconds when a base was occupied. There was a maximum of 2:05 between innings and a 2:30 limit for a pitching change. Additionally, hitters were required to have one foot in the batter's box at all times.

http://espn.go.com/mlb/story/_/id/12172 ... iple-games

It would also be great if the home plate umpire didn't call strikes and balls. Oh, and an automatic ball for anything over the pitch clock, or auto strike for any batter stepping out of the box. (Maybe that was the rule, but I didn't click on the link! )

[Indy]

12 seconds with no runners is OK, I guess.

As for the 20-second clock with runners, does it reset if the pitcher throws to a base? 20 seconds to pitch seems really, really constraining if you have runners taking leads.

It would have to reset if he throws to a base.

[JCSunsfan]

12 seconds with no runners is OK, I guess.

As for the 20-second clock with runners, does it reset if the pitcher throws to a base? 20 seconds to pitch seems really, really constraining if you have runners taking leads.

It would have to reset if he throws to a base.

I wonder if a runner could use the clock to steal bases.

[Cap]

12 seconds with no runners is OK, I guess.

As for the 20-second clock with runners, does it reset if the pitcher throws to a base? 20 seconds to pitch seems really, really constraining if you have runners taking leads.

It would have to reset if he throws to a base.

I wonder if a runner could use the clock to steal bases.

If the clock doesn't reset, then certainly. You know he has to pitch, so just take off right before the clock expires.

If the clock does reset, it incentives the pitcher to throw to the bases, which could actually slow the game down.

[Indy]

12 seconds with no runners is OK, I guess.

As for the 20-second clock with runners, does it reset if the pitcher throws to a base? 20 seconds to pitch seems really, really constraining if you have runners taking leads.

It would have to reset if he throws to a base.

I wonder if a runner could use the clock to steal bases.

If the clock doesn't reset, then certainly. You know he has to pitch, so just take off right before the clock expires.

If the clock does reset, it incentives the pitcher to throw to the bases, which could actually slow the game down.

Maybe. But it would mean he still has to get back and ready to throw in 20 seconds after throwing to the base. Would throw off his rhythm if he kept doing that (I would think).

But the base stealing is interesting. Wonder if that could be held in check (but still keep it viable) by limiting when runners can lead off.

[Cap]

A related rule change that I've thought of before: Limit the number of times a pitcher can throw to a base between pitches. If you throw to first three times in a row without picking off the runner, the runner gets a base.

Perhaps not necessary. It's pretty rare that a pitcher goes to a base three times between pitches without picking off the runner. But when it does happen, it's annoying.

I think my proposed rule change would combine well with the resetting pitch clock, countering the incentive to keep resetting.

[JCSunsfan]

If they just sped it up with no runners on base, cut the time between innings, and in pitching changes, it would speed things up.

[Charlie Smithy!]

I really do appreciate your thoughts on this, guys.

Maybe (more like probably) it's because I usually watch NBA games live, but I find them rife with just as many annoying stoppages.

TV timeouts, ticky-tack/questionable fouls, as well as intentional fouling (I do recognize the strategic element) all grate on me in terms of disrupting the flow of the game. I really should try and DVR an NBA game one of these days to see how it alters the experience for me.

In regards to baseball, not gonna lie - you're looking at a 3-hour affair (at least) every time out, unless it's a pitchers' duel.

I've always appreciated the fact that baseball is a time-less (note the hyphen! Lol) sport - even when it is a source of frustration for me, as I really can't stand slugfests. However, most of the time, there's just something about the slow-burn of it all (especially if you're at the ballpark in person, for me anyway) that really makes the payoff at the end worthwhile for me, no matter the outcome.

So yeah, I'm one of those statistical outliers of Americans who finds both basketball and football mind-numbing at times due to their collective stoppages in action (more so with football). While, at the same time, enjoying such sports as soccer and baseball.

And no, I really can't explain the irony, haha.

As a post-script, I will say this (and yes, I recognize it's a loaded statement): I feel that baseball, for many, is not understood (or maybe appreciated) as well as it could/should be. Speaking for myself obviously, but there truly is a chess-like game-within-a-game going on for me when i watch it.

Ah well, to each their own; here's hoping that baseball keeps going and that the NL never adopts the DH! Lol.

[Flagrant Fowl]

It's bizarre over here in Korea. Baseball is by far the most popular sport in the country, and not only millennials, but full grown adult humans, can't be bothered to put down their smartphone for more than 5 minutes at a time. It's the most ADD society I've experienced, and they love baseball.

On the other hand, Korean baseball games are a blast to attend. Reasonable ticket prices, $3-4 beers, cheerleaders and chants specific for each player. Kinda makes up for the lack of talent on the field in comparison to MLB.

[TOO]

I liked baseball better when there were steroids.